Inspiration for the Fake 'Diary'

[Steve S]

I think you may have it.....Stereotypical appearance..Off the scene at the right time.....

[ChrisGeorge]

I think you may have it.....Stereotypical appearance..Off the scene at the right time.....

Maybrick fits the modern stereotypical view of the Ripper, due to Hollywood's usual conception of the Ripper, even if not the view exactly that people might have had in 1888.



Scene from the Hughes Brothers film From Hell (2001).



Example of the cover of a recent book on the case.

[Jason]

i havent read too much about the diary recently.....has it been totally and utterly shafted as a document or is it still 'up in the air' as they say ? .......personally quite liked the idea of JTR being a scouser !! ( as one myself before anyone starts ! ).....putting Liverpool on the map 70 years before the Beatles !

[ChrisGeorge]

i havent read too much about the diary recently.....has it been totally and utterly shafted as a document or is it still 'up in the air' as they say ? .......personally quite liked the idea of JTR being a scouser !! ( as one myself before anyone starts ! ).....putting Liverpool on the map 70 years before the Beatles !

Well as a fellow Scouser and a historian I would say Liverpool didn't need the Beatles to put it on the map, quite frankly.

The Diary will remain a hoax to those who believe it so, and I believe that includes all leading Ripperologists. As for proving the Diary and the watch conclusively to be fakes, that's proven a bit harder to do, particularly because the scientific tests have been inconclusive.

All the best

Chris

[sleekviper]

Well wouldn't Maybrick be a medical marvel if he were? He had been doing arsenic for years, long term exposure leads to night blindness. Well I guess it could explain never being seen, who could do more than shake their heads at a guy running into walls and lamp posts.

[Jason]

Well as a fellow Scouser and a historian I would say Liverpool didn't need the Beatles to put it on the map, quite frankly.

The Diary will remain a hoax to those who believe it so, and I believe that includes all leading Ripperologists. As for proving the Diary and the watch conclusively to be fakes, that's proven a bit harder to do, particularly because the scientific tests have been inconclusive.

All the best

Chris

too true of course its always been on the map !

not the old "tests have been inconclusive" argument ? is that still the case ? thought it would have been well disproved by now ? .......bet that annoys the hell out of some folk ! ....

[Jason]

as side question, are you a believer in the diary Chris ?

[ChrisGeorge]

as side question, are you a believer in the diary Chris ?

NO. It's a hoax. Whether an old hoax or a new hoax has still to be determined. My inclination is to think that it was mocked up post-1988. It doesn't even look authentic, I don't think... a clear pastiche of the Ripper letters and other bits and pieces.

Chris

[Kaz]

For me the inspiration doesn't need explaining as much as the provenance, how did Barratt REALLY get his grubby mitts on it? Seems to me you have to call alot of people liars not to believe the explanation.

I also can't believe those scratches aren't actually there, according to my eyes they are anyway...

[Phil Carter]

The first resurgence of Beatlemania came around the centennial of the murders, and the hoaxer wanted to bring Liverpool back into the forefront.

Hello Scott,

to be fair, that camgaign ' it was 25 years ago'- was a record company gimmick to boost ailing sales and the Beatles flagship was used. The same was done with the 'One' album many years later.
It could be said that the three reasons to do this Diary lark were money, infamy and the classic 'jump on the bandwagon and exploit the weakness of Ripperolgy- 'suckers for an answer'.

But- after Sickert and Knight's well made story ALMOST got through the hole in the fence the senses within Ripperology were sharpened all round. I reajy and honestly dont think the fight back of such intensity was expected- Knight and Sickert got off relatively lightly in comparison.

I have, elsewhere said that the Morris, Linder and Skinner book should be paid more attention to. It tells much.
I also have the feeling that some know a great deal more than they can say and know the reasons why all this started.

Thank you Stewart for this thread.

Kindly

Phil

[Steve S]

NO. It's a hoax. Whether an old hoax or a new hoax has still to be determined. My inclination is to think that it was mocked up post-1988. It doesn't even look authentic, I don't think... a clear pastiche of the Ripper letters and other bits and pieces.

Chris

One of the moments where you wish the Forum had a "Like" button........

[dlew919]

One of the moments where you wish the Forum had a "Like" button........

I don't think the ripper wrote it, but a part of me has an inkling maybrick might have written it. I m not going to do more than speculate, but the details found, the inner knowledge and the circumstances to me suggest that just possibly, maybe, maybrick fantasised about being the killer, the diary was discovered, and justice was given out, leaving poor florie to take the fall.

Please note, this is not a definitive theory: the idea it was an abandoned novel works well too. But maybrick as deranged fantasist is worthy of speculation.

[caz]

I am not especially swayed by the comparison with the Kempshall case or Kempshall's Jack the Ripper claim...

...the hoaxer wouldn't have needed the Kempshall case to devise the Diary and hang the shingle of Jack the Ripper on the unfortunate Maybrick.

Hi Chris, All,

But rather an odd coincidence, don't you think, if the hoaxer(s) - modern or not so modern - chose Maybrick, and had him write that "Bunny knows all", without knowing a thing about the Kempshall case and its similar Jack the Ripper connection.

Conversely, any faker coming across the Kempshall case while researching Maybrick should surely have seen the risks inherent in stealing an element from one to use in t'other, given that someone (in this case Stewart ) was bound to know about both cases and pounce on the similarities.

That's why the idea that the diary represents an abandoned novel - or some other kind of literary experiment - has always been an interesting one to my mind. The Kempshall case would merely have provided some clear and obvious inspiration for the work (via the lady's supposed belief that her merchant lover was the ripper), while it not mattering a jot if it was never meant nor expected to be taken as anyone's genuine murder confession.

Having it come out of Battlecrease might have caused a right old stir, of course - at least temporarily. But the handwriting would soon have prevented any real mud sticking to poor old Maybrick.

Wouldn't it?

Love,

Caz
X

[L A Lester]

I've often wondered if the Maybrick Diary wasn't created by someone who wanted to extort the £5000 insurance settlement that Michael received in 1892 from Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association for the life insurance James took out on the business, his wife and kids.

[ChrisGeorge]

Having it come out of Battlecrease might have caused a right old stir, of course - at least temporarily. But the handwriting would soon have prevented any real mud sticking to poor old Maybrick.

Wouldn't it?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz

Of course, the handwriting in the Diary doesn't match Maybrick's, but that doesn't stop Diary supporters saying he wrote it. Because there's always the multiple personality disorder theory to support the fact that he did write it, which is what Shirley Harrison contended. Thus belief in the Diary is a win-win situation. Most likely, the Diary will always have believers, just like the Royal Conspiracy theory.

All the best

Chris